Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Brewis, Joanna
(2021).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2020.1837829
Abstract
Although Collier’s (2002) ‘emotional economy’ of academia is well travelled in management and organization studies research, this literature is predominantly informed by Hochschild’s (1983) original formulation of emotional labour as mandated by management for commercial reasons. Equally, there is little analysis of research and even less of receiving peer reviews. Nonetheless, authors can find peer review emotionally challenging, especially when they receive rejections or caustic reviews. Qualitative interviews with management and organization studies academics indicate an understanding of the receipt of peer reviews as properly governed by Bolton’s (2005, 2009; Bolton and Boyd, 2003) prescriptive feeling rules. This suggests such emotion work demands private processing to underpin public displays, even though these are anonymized and written. It may mean authors choose not to appeal to editors about reviewing outcomes except where due process has been breached, as well as involving proxy work by editors to forestall potential hurt to authors.
Viewing alternatives
Download history
Metrics
Public Attention
Altmetrics from AltmetricNumber of Citations
Citations from DimensionsItem Actions
Export
About
- Item ORO ID
- 72815
- Item Type
- Journal Item
- ISSN
- 1477-2760
- Keywords
- academia; emotional labour; emotion management; management and organization studies; receiving peer reviews.
- Academic Unit or School
-
Faculty of Business and Law (FBL) > Business > Department for People and Organisations
Faculty of Business and Law (FBL) > Business
Faculty of Business and Law (FBL) - Copyright Holders
- © 2020 Informa UK Limited
- Depositing User
- Joanna Brewis